1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sister site to Casino Max launches

    Roaring 21 has just launched - sister casino to Casino Max, and they have a special promotion for you!! .They are in the Baptism by Fire - you can check them out here: Roaring 21 BBF and special promo.


    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

BGO Exclusive Promo: 25 free spins with No Wagering on Archangels Salvation

Get Up to 25 free spins on Archangels: Salvation
No wagering requirements and No Max Win cap!

New Depositing players ONLY.
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

How Many Online Casinos Cheat?

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by ThodorisK, Aug 22, 2007.

    Aug 22, 2007
  1. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    Theodoros Kiriakopoulos
    Athens, Greece

    After having played many thousands of blackjack hands (yes, I am a poor bonus hunter), and considering my overall stats and my stats in each particular casino, I consider more and more probable the obvious and common sense conclusion: Since some casinos have the ability, the software to cheat, then they all do HAVE this CAPABILITY to cheat, they all have cheating software as a tool ready to use IF and WHEN they decide to do so. If small casinos have this weapon, dont the large and reputable casinos have it too? Now when they use it, is a matter of superior management decisions. So I think that when they decide to cheat, they usually cheat by adding a small or large percentage to the house edge of any game, e.g. when they confront too many "bonus abusers" or when a high roller is on a winning streak, etc.

    No software provider is safe, as the initial program that the software provider gives to the casinos might be ok, but a cheating program can be added afterwards. It might be that the software provider company has nothing to do with these cheating programs.

    But casinos are hesitating to cheat because even if they cheat 1 out of 100 hands, this is shown statistically in a few thousands of hands (which happens to be the wagering requirement for a bonus). So indeed, large reputable casinos who aim at increasing their market share and have no cash flow problems, are less likely to cheat than smaller casinos who have a hit-and-run plan and a chance to run out of cash when a high roller has a winning streak. Also, more dangerous are the casinos which offer bonuses with which one can make a considerable profit if played appropriately. I also think that some casinos want to attract exactly the bonus abusers ! And then of course, cheat them.

    I will focus in the problem of proving cheating with statistical analysis. In this thread I will post some stats regarding some casinos, some statistical analysis of these data, and other theoretical considerations in this. I present many theoritical considersations of this problem, also in my posts in the thread: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/online-casinos/14540-vc-casino-fair-black-jack.html
     
    2 people like this.
  2. Aug 22, 2007
  3. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    BLACKJACK HEAVEN

    Stats from 09/08/07, 06:37 to 15/08/07

    The first hand of sample No2 is the next hand played after the last hand of sample No2. Therefore these 2 samples can also be regarded as one sample

    Sample No1 09/08/07, 06:37

    Hands = 290
    Average bet = 1.124$ (260 hands*1$, 28 hands*2$, 1 hand*4$, 1 hand*6$)
    Loss = 57.5$

    Departures from basic strategy that lost = 2, plus 2 stands on a 16 against a dealers 10

    (I lost all my bankroll after this sample was completed)

    Sample No2 (15/08/07)

    Hands = 75
    Average bet = 1$ (75 hands*1$)
    Loss =22$

    Departures from basic strategy that lost = 1

    (I lost all my bankroll after this sample was completed)

    Having lost my deposited bankroll in both above samples, it is applicable (regarding sample No1, and sample No2, and the combined sample of No1 and No2), to use the risk of ruin probability, and it is not applicable to use a hypothesis test, in order to prove cheating (see theoretical considerations that discuss this at: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/online-casinos/14540-vc-casino-fair-black-jack.html).

    Ignoring the hand in which I violated basic strategy, reganding sample No2, the risk of ruin of losing 21$ in 74 hands by placing 1$ on each hand, is 3.336%.
    (using the calculator: You must register/login in order to see the link.) The value of standard deviation per 100 hands I put is 11.3)

    I e-maled some of the above stats to Blackjack Heaven. They answered:

    Theodoros,
    Thanks for those stats, but they just seem to measure your number of hands played and your loss (over only 365 hands), and therefore I remain slightly confused as to what you are claiming. Are you trying to say our software is in someway unfair? I can assure you that this is not the case. What it appears you have experienced is a run of bad luck and, while frustrating, this is something which happens from time to time while gambling.
    Do you have any other comments or stats?
    Thanks,
    Neil


    I answer here: Very powerful counter-argument indeed. You are saying that I won in some other casinos, so the overall results might fall close to the statistically expected losses.

    First of all, the results of any NEW sample OF THE LAST HANDS PLAYED, (according to todays science) are INDEPENDENT from the previous ones, and therefore they should fall close to the average-expected values.

    But yes, the more one wagers, the higher the probability of meeting a very long run of bad luck. But the counter-argument to this is that what is the number of hands that should be taken in account? Would that be the whole amount of gambling I have played since I was born? Perhaps also the amount of gambling I played in my previous lives? Therefore you are saying that in order for cheating to be proved or at least indicated, one must present a run of bud luck that had less than 1 in a trillion to happen?

    It does not matter if the sample is small or large. What it matters is the probability that is derived from it. The demand for a large sample can only be justified when connected to the argument "yes, but you have had an enormous amount of gambling". So I have to consider the whole amount of gambling I have made since I was born?

    Therefore, perhaps, the amount of wagering that should be taken in account for judging the fairness of a casino, is the total number of hands that I played in every particular casino.

    Well, since I started playing in your casino, and before the above samples, I had lost another 200$, mostly playing blackjack. So you cannot claim that these previous results counterbalance somehow the above samples.
    We can have a further detailed analysis of my results in your casino since the day I started playing there. But this is almost an impossible fact for many reasons, e.g. the boss media hand history is not so helpful in this.

    Anyway, if I had to bet my life on the possibilty that you cheated me or on the possiblity that you did not cheat me, I would definatelly bet it on the first possibility.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2007
  4. Aug 22, 2007
  5. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    BETFAIR

    I deposited 70euros and started the wagering for the 75euros bonus. I played single deck blackjack and without ever by balance exceeding my initial deposit, I kept losing. Lost my deposit and had to reload. Results after I completed wagering:

    hands=893
    average bet=1.38 euros
    profit/loss=-76.5 euros

    Also, when I had completed about 750 hands, I was 98 euros down.

    I did bet about 10 euros once and lost. If I remember well, all the other bets were of 1 or 2 euros. I also violated basic strategy a few times, but I think this had a small effect. Anyway, for these and other reasons, I do not provide statistical analysis for this casino.
     
  6. Aug 22, 2007
  7. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
  8. Aug 22, 2007
  9. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount. webby PABnononaccred

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    To sum it all up for you:

    They all cheat.

    Quit gambling online.

    Save your money and take a trip to Vegas, or any other casino that is somewhat local for you.

    I don't know about anyone else, but this is getting very old.
     
    2 people like this.
  10. Aug 22, 2007
  11. BBKPoker

    BBKPoker halfway to busto PABrogue3

    Occupation:
    None
    Location:
    Edinburgh, Seattle, Vancouver BC, Auckland
    So you are a bonus abuser who has an actual gambling problem because you don't play optimally, play way more than the established number of hands to clear a bonus, and your upset that you are losing money?

    You sound like a whale of a customer to me. If I was a casino, I'd keep offering you bonuses to keep you around, and I'd keep sending you very nice apologies about your luck (along with a few small free bonuses) every time you sent me a laughable email about why the software is supposedly rigged.

    Many of the casinos you've named here run on gaming software provided by companies that do not let you edit payout tables. We know RTG lets providers edit slot returns, but I doubt any software provider that is remotely reputable allows you to edit blackjack returns.

    So far, you've named casinos that run on:

    Chartwell (VCCasino, Betfair)
    and
    Boss Media (Blackjack Heaven).

    Extremely reputable sites such as Bodog, Paradise Poker, Sporting Bet, Wall Street Casino etc, have used Boss. VCCasino is about as reputable as a casino can be without being an eCograd'd Microgaming site.

    I think you just need to take a time out from gambling until you can discipline yourself to play properly if your goal is to make money from bonuses.
     
    3 people like this.
  12. Aug 22, 2007
  13. paul02085

    paul02085 Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Fishing :)
    Location:
    USA
    26 1/2 (one only cheats half the time).
     
  14. Aug 22, 2007
  15. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    GLOBAL PLAYER

    I was playing single deck blackjack, a game where using the well known particular basic strategy, gives the player an 0.1% -0.15% edge. But I was not 100% faithful to the basic strategy, so I cannot really give a statistical analysis with the below data. However, the results of my LAST hands in that casino were:

    2,175 hands played
    4,324 euros wagered
    average bet = 2 euros
    profit/loss result = -198 euros.

    Now (according to the risk of ruin calculator at You must register/login in order to see the link.), if I had used 100% faithfully the basic strategy for Boss Media single deck blackjack, and I was flatbetting 2 euros on each hand, then after 2,175 hands the probability that I would lose these 198 euros, would be 5.58% If my departure from basic strategy resulted in a 1% house edge, then the corresponing risk of ruin probabilty would be 12.3% And if my departure from basic strategy resulted in a 2% house edge, then the corresponding risk of ruin probability would be 22.2%. But I don’t think that the particular basic strategy violations I made, costed me that much.
     
  16. Aug 22, 2007
  17. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    "...… there are sites using rogue software that must be exposed. I list some of which I am aware on my On-Line Casino Blacklist.” I had read a couple of his warnings with particular interest. One warning concerned a company offering the chance to establish your own casino. Its advert reveals a nasty can of worms:
    “Our proprietary random number generator is calculating profit before the winning /loosing (sic) number is sent back to the game. You can set a minimum profit that’s always kept for you. This also ensures that you will not wake up with $20,000 debts! ”
    This same company boasts on its own site:
    “The software is very good, with great control over the profit/winnings. It has the ability to change the winning % per game/table in real-time. Also you can withdraw the profit and limit player's winnings. Games are completely random, if the winning is within the limit. If the bet is causing winning over the set limit, the generator is generating another number until the winning is within the limit (or player loses).”
    Note the words in italics! This is precisely the experience I have suffered. Having been encouraged by winning, suddenly whatever I do is wrong. I road-tested the game to (my) destruction. Having started playing even chance positions (18 numbers) and losing whatever chance I backed, I kept on increasing the numbers played till I was playing thirty-three a spin. The four other numbers kept hitting! I was then cleaned out. My experience was a precise fit with the boasted ability of the software.
    ..."


    Michael Shackleford (You must register/login in order to see the link.)
     
  18. Aug 23, 2007
  19. uungy

    uungy Dormant account PABnononaccred PABnoaccred PABaccred

    Whats that to do with it? its a different software provider and has been named and shamed here about 2 years ago
     
  20. Aug 23, 2007
  21. dealer wins

    dealer wins Experienced Member

    Occupation:
    Finncial Controler
    Location:
    London the sh$thole
    I play a lot of BJ online and most seems fair.

    The one that really sticks out to me as being well dodgy is paddypower flash BJ (not sure what software as its not a downloaded casino).

    I have played loads of sessions (over 50) and I can honestly say I have not had one decent session where I have done well. Yes a couple of small wins here and there, but not 1 really good, dealer busting, hitting 10s on double down, sort of win. (And I have had loads and loads of very bad, even HIDEOUS sessions out of those 50 sessions believe me).


    Even when I get to normal land casinos every few trips will net me one or two good wins on BJ, and the same goes for most online places, but I can honestly say at Paddys something just isnt right.

    (I am quite loyal to Paddys because its my local bookie and I have been betting there for 15 years) ... stupid me hey
     
  22. Aug 23, 2007
  23. happygobrokey

    happygobrokey Dormant account

    Occupation:
    student of life
    Location:
    canada
    don't you guys realise? thodorisk is smarter than all of us here, smarter than bryan, smarter than wizard of odds. he is even smarter than those at the forefront of physics and medicine. so smart in fact that he dares not share his advances in those fields; he must have a good reason to know that we mortals are not ready for the enlightenment he could provide.

    but please sir, give us the secrets to cures that the government and pharmaceutical companies don't want us to know about. even if the knowledge you possess is beyond our comprehension, please sir, people are dying! and while you're at it, use your intimate knowledge of physics to create free energy devices, so we no longer have to be slaves to the fossil fuel industry. free the world from the powers that be. help build a utopia!

    don't just tell us all how good you are without manning up. jesus didn't go around just saying he can heal the sick and raise the dead, he made it happen! so take your vast and superior knowledge and put it to good use. bragging on a forum will not get you the immortality you desire. :thumbsup:
     
    7 people like this.
  24. Aug 23, 2007
  25. pacers31

    pacers31 Banned Used - Repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Marketing Rep
    Location:
    Californication
    DOH!! BORRRIIIINNNNGGGG!!!
     
  26. Aug 23, 2007
  27. SlotsWizard

    SlotsWizard Dormant account webmeister

    Occupation:
    I currently work for the Wizard of Odds
    Location:
    North of Antarctica
    No comment necessary. :rolleyes:
     
    4 people like this.
  28. Aug 23, 2007
  29. happygobrokey

    happygobrokey Dormant account

    Occupation:
    student of life
    Location:
    canada
    he was counting cards, duh! :p

    :thumbsup:
     
    1 person likes this.
  30. Aug 23, 2007
  31. pokeraddict

    pokeraddict Webmaster

    Occupation:
    Pro Poker Player
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    You get a lot of respect here. Most spammers don't get that low. So you have a long ridiculous rant about poker being rigged, now you're off on casinos. Your number of hands is not enough to mean anything. You've proven nothing more then you are a sore loser. Why have you not stopped gambling?
     
    1 person likes this.
  32. Aug 23, 2007
  33. SlotsWizard

    SlotsWizard Dormant account webmeister

    Occupation:
    I currently work for the Wizard of Odds
    Location:
    North of Antarctica
    :lolup: THAT explains it! You're right! He really IS smarter than all of us!
     
    1 person likes this.
  34. Aug 23, 2007
  35. EasyRhino

    EasyRhino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    San Diego
    Whoah whoah, no need for name calling.

    Theodoros, I'm not a statistics expert, but I do play a lot of blackjack, and I've done read a lot of the esoteric stuff about card counting.

    First, you sample sizes are far too small. Even a few thousand hands is a very small sample when you're playing a game with such a small advantage (or disadvantage). Someone else would have to bust out standard deviations and means, but I doubt that your results are any big deal. As a reality check, there are a few professional card-counters out there (not many, but a few) who have had negative YEARS playing in the casinos, despite playing with an advantage the whole time.

    Second, you misused the risk of ruin calculator over at qfit.com. That's not the proper tool to tell you the odds of losing 198 or more units when starting with 1000. That's a tool to tell you the odds of losing 198 units when you start with 198. Different math.

    Third, what's with the basic strategy deviations, man? Unless you're making composition dependent plays, wha'ts the point? No self-respecting bonus whore would do such a thing.
     
    2 people like this.
  36. Aug 23, 2007
  37. chuchu59

    chuchu59 gambling addict CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    EXECUTIVE
    Location:
    SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
    I really dont know how many casinos cheat but:

    Casinos can cheat some players all of the time and
    cheat all of the players some of the time but of course they cant cheat all of the players all of the time.

    PS: Now just where did I see this quote before?
     
    2 people like this.
  38. Aug 23, 2007
  39. ThodorisK

    ThodorisK Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007

    Occupation:
    writer
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    I lost my whole of deposited money which was 198. But even if I had more in my account, the application of the risk of ruin probability was correct.
    When one stops counting his stats at the lowest point of his currect bankroll, HE CAN use the risk of ruin probability to find what was the probability that could happen. And all that based on the number of hands.
    I site the theoretical considerations that support this, at:http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/online-casinos/14540-vc-casino-fair-black-jack.html
    I indeed made a mistake of applying risk of ruin in the past, and this mistake is at my first posts at the above thread. But exactly that mistake lead me to its correction and to more knowledge on the matter. I myself always doubt my so far conclusions with counterarguments. A counterargument immediatelly indicates the next counterargument, and thus one digs towards more knowledge.

    I violated basic strategy just a few times, because I was experimenting to find a possibly existent bias in the randomness of the random number generators (and take full advantage of it). In other casinos these experiments were very successful. Yes, in a way, I was trying to find a way to "card count", since if there is a bias, then this bias creates a pattern according to which the groups of high and low cards are clustering in a non-random way. Of course, later I realised that instead of trying to take most advantage of a possibly existent bias, it would be better to make sure such a bias actually exists, and what exactly is. And for this, I had to follow basic strategy 100% and change only the size of my bets. Also, basic strategy can identify cheating, as one has a fixed edge. Finally, I conceived a theoretical proof that it is impossible for the outcomes of a random number generator to be completelly random. The reason they cannot be random is also the discovery and the proof of this discovery. But this discovery is of course quite useless, IF all casinos cheat SOMETIMES. So I might reveal it soon, but not in this thread. And as you see, I cannot start a new thread.
    BUT I AM NOT 100% CERTAIN that this discovery of mine and its proof are true. But so far I cannot prove it wrong.

    As for my other knowledge about physics and medicine, you will never find it out I guess, not through this site anyway. I did not come to this site to reveal or discuss these. And if you really wanted me to discuss these things (not in this thread, of course), then you would not give me these negative reputation points.

    All the other nonsense of you other guys is just affiliates defending their business. So are the negative reputation points you gave me.
    "More clever than Bryan and the rest of you"? But my friend, you and Bryan are affiliates. You have common interests with the casinos. Bryan MIGHT have other motives too, as PERHAPS that casinos should not cheat or deny winnings, (either because it is bad for the industry on the whole or because these are his personal principles), I really dont know, but the fact remains that he has common interests with the casinos. Am I wrong? Explain to me why.
     

Share This Page